3. 3
Executive Summary
The Symbiotic Machine (SM) is the result of a
close collaboration between an artist and a
scientist in an ArtScience project. Part of the
project was the exhibition of the SM in the
Glazen Huis in the Amstelpark in Amsterdam
from 9th of March up to the 27th of April
2014. The SM is an autonomous robot that
searches for its own energy source and
follows an infinite loop of steps. The SM
shows the principle of photosynthesis based
on organic biosolar cells outside the lab. The
SM is developed by artist Ivan Henriques in
collaboration with Raoul Frese and Vincent
Friebe, scientists of VU Amsterdam Laser Lab,
physicist Michiel van Overbeek and engineer
Xavier Leydervan from Cefet/RJ
(Technological School from Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil). With the help of: 3D LAB - Koninklijke
Academie voor Beeldende Kunsten Den Haag,
Botanische Tuin TUDelft, Haagse Hoogeschool
Den Haag, Hortus Leiden, Hortus Amsterdam.
This project was sponsored by Stichting
DOEN.
In this report we focused on whether or not
ArtScience projects can lead to innovation. I
obtained the information by conducting
interviews with some of the participants. In
the workshop for children, that I provided,
biosolar cell were constructed in way that
mirrors the robot. That even children were
able to make them emphasized on the lack of
preparation needed to construct the biosolar
cells. This showcased the main principle of
the scientific research. The biosolar cells used
in the SM follows the research from Raoul
Frese´s research group to incorporate
untreated photosynthetic membranes as solar
cell material. The novelty is that normally
extra compounds would be added to enhance
cycling of electrons, instead they used the
naturally available mediators from the
biological cells.
The art aspects of the robot can be identified
by the many layers the SM incorporates. One
layer is the SM as the algae powered robot
(APR). Another layer is the SM as the robot in
nature. The artist thus positions the SM as a
gateway to make people think how to design
the future. Furthermore the SM as an artwork
also includes the construction of the SM. The
success of the SM as a result of the ArtScience
project is highlighted by receiving a honorary
mention at the PRIX ARS electronica and
airtime on Discovery Channel Canada.
From this analysis I came to the conclusion
that ArtScience projects can lead to
innovation. This is mainly due to its
transdisciplinary character. The benefit of
innovation in society is that it can accelerate
finding solutions for complex societal
problems. The potential of ArtScience is being
realized because of the different backgrounds
and disciplines of the participants. It is clear
that they have different perceptions on the
artwork, but they are not opposites. All
participants were focused on creating an
satisfying end-goal. However the scientists
are focused on the science aspects of the
artwork which mainly included finding a way
of showing the general public the simplicity of
how biosolar cells can be build. The art
aspects were defined by the artist who
focused on the many layers the SM withholds.
By contributing to this project I came to the
following recommendation: I believe it is of
great value to stimulate ArtScience projects
because it contributes in looking at society
from a more holistic perspective. With this
view we are able to find more out-of-the-box
solutions which can contribute in solving
problems in different and in a possible more
effective way.
4. 4
Preface
The Symbiotic Machine (SM) is the result of an ArtScience project of artist Ivan Henriques and Raoul
Frese. The SM uses biosolar cells to generate its own energy originated from the algae and was
exhibited in the Glazen Huis in Amsterdam from March 9th till April 27th.
In an ArtScience project people from different disciplines and backgrounds work together on an
invention which possible can be an innovation. In this transdisciplinary way of working none of the
participants have an overview of the project. In my 4 month during internship I, as a Science,
Business and Innovation student, had the privilege to create this helicopter view of the ArtScience
project which was conducted by artist Ivan Henriques and scientist Raoul Frese. To obtain a better
understanding of the project, I also were contributing to the project by providing workshops for
children on behave of the SM.
The helicopter view that I created is described in this report and will answer the main question:
whether an ArtScience project can lead to innovation? Furthermore I formulated to following sub
questions.
Innovation
I. How can the combination of art and science lead to innovation?
II. What are the benefits of innovation in society?
Artscience
I. How is the ArtScience project perceived by the participants?
II. What are the art aspects of the project?
III. What are the science aspects of the project?
The main source of information was through conducting interviews with the participants.
Furthermore I contributed to the it by providing the workshops for children which showed the
simplicity of how biosolar cells can be build. This was also the main purpose of the scientific
research that supported to the SM.
This report also contains the information of research I was involved in concerning the Spirogyra
algae and the biosolar cells. More information on the Symbiotic Machine can be found on
http://www.raoulfrese.nl/the-symbiotic-machine/
My special thanks goes to the research team for giving me the opportunity to work on such a special
project.
.
5. 5
The story of the Symbiotic Machine
The birth of an idea
What is the Symbiotic Machine?
The Symbiotic Machine (SM) is an art
project that comprises the utilization of
scientifically discovered biosolar cells in
an algae powered robot, which is exhibited
for the public in a gallery. An important
aspect of the art project was the assembly
of the individual parts into a functioning
robot at the gallery, as well the
construction of an in-house pond.
Concomitantly, under the flag of SM
workshops are held where children
construct their own biosolar cells,
functioning much alike those within the
robot. This, together with video
presentations, lectures and workshops for
adults comprises the artwork SM.
From plant machine to Symbiotic Machine
The birth of the Symbiotic Machine was the
result of two factors merging together: the
research on biosolar cells by Raoul Frese and
the plant machine made by Ivan Henriques.
The plant machine called the Jurema Action
Plant (JAP) is an interactive bio-machine
consisting out of a machine and a plant. The
JAP is set up in such a way that it empowers
the plant to move away from people who
touch it. This is done by using a signal
amplifier that reads the differences in the
electromagnetic field around the plant. The
electromagnetic field is changed when it is
being touched. This triggers the plant to move
away from the person who touches it. The
JAP was exhibited in Milan in 2011. It was
here that Ivan got in touch with Stichting
DOEN, who offered potential funding to
further develop the plant machine.
With the idea of “plant machine 2.0”., Ivan and
Raoul applied for the Designers & Artists 4
Genomics Award (DA4GA) in 2012. The
DA4GA aims to stimulate the collaborations
between designers, artists and scientist to
delve into the world of bio-art, and produce
new work. In the initial idea the ancestor of
the Symbiotic Machine was riding on wheels
and harvesting algae from the pond. The
choice for the photosynthetic material of
algae was based on the fact that it is widely
available in the Netherlands (during summer
time). The material cannot be re-used
therefore a wide availability of the
photosynthetic material is requirement. Since
the Spirogyra algae have the characteristic to
“pollute” ponds in the Netherlands because of
its excessive growth, it seemed the perfect
photosynthetic material to complete the solar
cells.
The idea was recognized by the DA4GA and in
the final a second version had to be presented.
Because the photosynthetic material of the
algae would only generate a small amount of
energy the SM 2.0 had to be transformed into
a unit that uses a minimum of energy in all its
functions. By changing the idea of riding on
wheels into a floating unit a lot of energy
could be saved. And with this the idea for the
Symbiotic Machine as we know it today was
born.
Figure 1: From Jurema Action Plant to Symbiotic
Machine on wheels (made by Ivan henriques)
6. 6
ArtScience
ArtScience can be defined as “integrating all human knowledge through the processes of invention and
exploration.” This new way of conceiving knowledge takes place in an interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary and
cross-disciplinary way.
Supporters also state that “every major artistic advance, technological breakthrough, scientific discovery and
medical innovation since the beginning of civilization has resulted from the process of ArtScience.” ArtScience
from this perspective is thus an area with a lot of potential. Stimulating ArtScience will help to accelerate new
inventions by moving art from the galleries and science from their labs. It is therefore recommended to broaden
the curricula of both artist and scientists in order to connect these areas (Root-Bernstein et al., 2011).
The idea in the mind of an artist
Ivan Henriques describes himself as “a
transdisciplinary artist, developer, catalyst,
inventor, activist, who is inspired by science
and philosophy.” He believes the world as we
know it today can be different. By creating his
artworks, he provides the incentive for people
to think about the possibilities of a different
future. For Ivan the SM is born in this
philosophy as a sister of the Jurema Action
Plant (JAP)
(http://ivanhenriques.com/2011/06/02/jure
ma-action-plant/).(Henriques, I., Interview,
2014)
Ivan sees the SM as part of developing hybrid
entities that can live by themselves.
In the SM-prototype the autonomy starts
with two very basic need of life: to eat and to
have light, sharing the environment with
other forms of life” (Henriques, I., e-mail
communication, 2014)
There are however more layers to the SM;
with the SM Ivan hopes to inspire people to
think about the robotics in the future, how are
we going to communicate with other living
organisms, evolutionary design inspired by
nature, the purpose of photosynthesis, the
boundary of nature and technology, about
interdisciplinary projects and all its purposes.
All these layers are part of the SM.
Figure 5: Symbiosis: Man + Machine
By looking at the SM from this perspective
Ivan tries to stimulate the findings of creative
solution in today’s society.
“The SM open doors to think about
robotics in society in completely
different way. This stimulate out-of-
the-box ideas” – Ivan Henriques
Figure 4: Visualization of Symbiotic Machine as a
floating device (made by Ivan henriques)
Figure 2: Science
(Wonder) Art
7. 7
The biosolar cell
A biosolar cell is a device that makes it possible to generate electricity from photosynthetic material. It is
“non” technical device that can be made from simple material such as conductive metals and plant
material. The biosolar cell is based on the principle of photosynthesis. By grinding the plant material, the
photosynthetic material is released. When light shines on this photosynthetic material, which is put in
between the two metal electrodes; electricity is generated.
Biosolar cell has a very low impact on the environment because it makes use of abundant material in our
society that is re-usable or degradable. It therefore supports the idea of having a green society that is as
close to nature as possible. Scientist from the VU laserlab are investigating how to optimize the biosolar
cells. By using the biosolar cells in the Symbiotic Machine a proof of principle is tested and it provides a
door to general public to think about the beauty of photosynthesis from a scientific perspective.
According the Ivan “The SM cannot be seen as
a closed system as we see in science; its exact
purpose is not clear but by showcasing the SM
it initiate people to think about the purposes”.
As Ivan puts it: “the SM is as design. The
design is able to mutate in order to adapt its
functions and advance communicative
interfaces to continue its own evolution”
The SM is the product of various disciplines
transiting knowledge. As a creator and
catalyst, Ivan makes this transdisciplinary
project possible, by operating as a project
manager putting all pieces together to realize
the SM. (Henriques, I., Interview, 2014)
The idea in the mind of a scientist
Raoul Frese is a physicist currently working at
the VU University of Amsterdam. He is
specialized in biophysics of photosynthesis
and is carrying out research with his research
team. One way of looking at photosynthesis is
“through” biosolar cells. Biosolar cells are
researched in order to better understand
photosynthesis whereby knowledge can be
acquired to improve the productivity of
plants, solar cells and direct fuel production
and their performance. This research is done
in order to find solutions for the increasing
demands on plants for food. (BioSolarCells,
2014).
Within the workgroup of Raoul Frese
photosynthesis based solar cells and sensors
are being research for many years. Together
with students Frese constructed several
biosolar cells, made from isolated
photosynthetic complexes, membranes and
cell extracts. With a large array of techniques
the Frese group researches the precise
functionality of the bio hybrid solar cells. With
be biosolar cells used in the SM he
extrapolated on findings of his research team
that broken cells could be used directly as
biosolar material. These findings were
derived from research that showed that
membranes prepared in a more simple
fashion then before: a crude membrane
extract could also be used as biosolar
material. (Frese, R.N., Interview, 2014)
“The SM is a solar panel that
showcases the possibilities of
utilizing photosynthetic material in a
technological fashion.” - Raoul Frese
Algae Powered Robot
The SM as an Algae Powered Robot (APR) is
used as a proof of principle that broken cells
could be directly used as biosolar material. To
show this principle, biosolar cells were
installed in the SM and a grinder was added to
break the photosynthetic material. To capture
the low-voltage electricity an energy
harvester was added that will charge a normal
battery. The sensors that “search” for the
algae could powered by this battery. Due to
Figure 6: Biosolar
cell
8. 8
Figure 7: The brain of the robot (made by
Ivan henriques)
some construction errors in the SM the proof
of principle could not be showed. Instead the
principle was shown in the workshops given
for children.
The workshops for children emphasized on
the simplicity of the construction creation of
biosolar cells. Children of the age of 6 were
able to create biosolar cells in the way they
are used in the SM. Exciting was that the
children-made-biosolar cells also could be
used to showcase the functionality of the cells.
(Frese, R.N., Interview, 2014)
Other key factors
Another key factor in creating the Symbiotic
Machine was Xavier Leydervan. He is a
mechanical engineering teacher at the
Cefet/Rio de Janeiro. Xavier helped Ivan
making the idea of the SM in something
practical. His contribution included working
out the floating device and the grinding
system.
Michiel van Overbeek is another important
key factor that was involved in the
construction of the SM. He is a physicist, who
is working in the field of ArtScience. He
helped Ivan with the electronics of the SM by
programming and installing the “brain” of the
robot and he developed the sensors.
Vincent Friebe is a PhD student under
supervision of Raoul. He helped with the
science part of the SM. He was responsible for
the choice of using Spirogyra algae and of
what material the biosolar cells should be
made of.
Beside the above mentioned persons there
were a lot of other people who contributed in
making the idea reality. Alice Smits
coordinated the activities around the
exhibition, the art production specialists
helped creating the exhibition space and other
students from Raoul’s research team helped
with whatever needed be done.
Making the
idea reality
The ArtScience project
Everbody that was involved with the
construction of the SM was part of the
ArtScience project. The project is not confined
by only the SM. Everything around it; the
process, the work prior to the exhibition and
after, the workshops, the lectures, are
included. (Frese, R.N., and Henriques I.,
Interview, 2014). The workshops for children
where provided by Marjolein Shiamatey with
the help of Vincent Friebe. To find a way of
making children able to construct biosolar
cells we conducted scientific research. In this
research we focused on which materials
provides the highest photo voltage and
photocurrent. We found that the copper-
copper combination provided the best result
with a peak photocurrent of 571 nA and a
peak photo voltage of 49mV per /cm^2. The
results can be found in appendix 2.0.
The resources
Creating an ArtScience artwork like the
Symbiotic Machine requires funding. This was
made possible by Stichting DOEN.
Figure 8: Making the with a vacuum forming
machine at the “Haagse hogeschool”
9. 9
Spirogyra algae
To “feed” the Symbiotic Machine Spirogyra algae was used. Spirogyra algae were chosen
because of their abundance in pounds in the Netherlands. When this type of algae receives
enough light it will make oxygen whereby it starts to float. The process of algae (and all
other green plants) of converting sunlight into energy and oxygen is called photosynthesis.
With the biosolar cells this process of photosynthesis is “hacked”.
This funding was used for the construction of
the SM. The VU contributed by making the
scientists available to work on the SM.
The plastic form of the robot was eventually
made in collaboration with the TUDelft, the
Haagse Hogeschool Den Hague and the 3D
LAB Koninklijke Academie van Beeldende
Kunsten, Den Haag. All the professional
vacuum forming companies in and around the
Netherlands asked very high prices or said it
was impossible to make. The Spirogyra algae
were acquired from the Hortus Botanicus
gardens in Amsterdam, Leiden and Delft,
because this kind of algae were not available
in outdoor ponds during the time of the
exhibition.
In the week before the exhibition all main
contributors were working in the Glazen Huis
to make the exhibition of the SM ready. At that
time the individual parts of the SM still
needed to be assembled. Also the biosolar
cells were tested in the robot, the “brain” of
the robot was programmed, the grinder was
optimized and more. At the same time diverse
people were working on preparing the
exhibition space.
Especially in this week became clear how all
participants were working in a
transdisciplinairy way. This way of working
stimulated open-mindedness and creativity in
all participants.
For example Vincent Friebe had to
“artistically” attach the solar cells in the robot,
Ivan had to think like a scientist in order to
Frese and his students had to conduct “lab”
experiments in the Glazen Huis.
In 2 years the idea of the SM became reality.
As part of the ArtScience project the SM was
exhibited in the Glazen Huis in the
Amstelpark, Amsterdam from 9th of March up
to the 27th of April 2014.
Figure 9:
Spirogyra algae
Figure 10: Vincent Friebe working on the biosolar
cells in the SM
Figure 11: The Team
10. 10
Exhibiting
the idea
On the 9th of March the exhibition of the
Symbiotic Machine was officially opened in
the Glazen Huis where guests were welcomed
with algae snacks and drinks. Apart from
seeing the Symbiotic Machine in action, guests
could watch movies about how the robot was
made and how it works. To support the
ArtScience aspect of the robot, scientific
information also made up a big part of the
exhibition space, together with the art
attributes Ivan made. Walking in the Glazen
Huis thus created a “feel” for the
scientific/technological aspects that formed
the basis of the SM as an artwork. This
together with the SM in the pond emphasized
on the art aspects of the exhibition.
Figure 12: Visitor looking at scientific information
During the weeks the SM was exhibited
several workshops were provided. Marjolein
and Vincent provided workshops for children
who got the opportunity to build their own
artistic biosolar cells. They also received
background information on the biosolar cells,
electricity and photosynthesis. That the
children were able to construct the biosolar
cells highlighted the simplicity of how the
cells can be build. This report shows that this
principle was also the starting point of the
scientific research that is represented in the
SM. Ivan provided a workshop for adults
wherein he talked about the artistic aspects of
the Symbiotic Machine.
More information
A lot of pictures were taken during the set-up
of the exhibition, the making of the SM and
during the workshops. The pictures and the
documents used for the exhibition and
workshops and other information on the
Machine can be found on
www.raoulfrese.nl/the-symbiotic-machine.
Points of improvements
The Symbiotic Machine was not only
exhibited but also “tested” during the time of
the exhibition. The Machine is based on a
principle that is known for many years. It is
however the first time the use of biosolar cells
has been used in an application.
The high rate of innovativeness therefore
made it a playground for problems to occur.
Many problems were filtered out before they
took place by considering the idea on paper in
detail. In the process of putting the idea into
practice problems appeared that were not on
the list.
One of the first problems that occurred only
became visible after the Symbiotic Machine
was tested in its “natural habitat” which was
replicated by the pool with algae inside of the
Glazen Huis. After the opening moisture was
discovered in the robot. The moisture could
potentially damage the electronics. Therefore
small holes were made in the top bowl. With
the extra holes the rate of escaping air
increased and with that the bowl filled with
water faster. The extra holes thus caused the
robot to sink which formed an even bigger
problem. Another problem was a leak where
the motor plus grinder compartment was
connected to the bowls.
Figure 13: Artistic biosolar cells made by children
12. 12
and science. (Overbeek, e-mail
communication, 2014).
Raoul agrees that considering the given
resources it would have been impossible to
make a perfect working APR. Taking these
matters into account the end-result is
astonishing. Without the art the APR would
have never received any attention. And if the
APR had worked perfectly the art would not
have been needed to receive attention. The art
made it thus possible to show the purposes of
the robot beyond todays useful application.
This also drew the attention of Discovery
Channel Canada where the APR was
showcased. Without the art this would never
have happened. (Frese, R.N., Interview, 2014)
The reactions of the visitors of the Glazenhuis
were divided into people who were very fond
of the idea and people who hesitated about
the potential danger of technology in nature.
The idea of the SM also travelled to
Istanbul/Turkey were it was presented at a
biotech conference. Fellow scientists of Raoul
Frese were both excited and critical about the
SM as they focused on the scientific feasibility
of the robot. From an innovation point of view
Peter van Hoorn, lecturer at the VU University
Amsterdam, stated that art objects like the SM
can contribute in solving societies problems.
Figure 16: Raoul Frese and Ivan
Henriques (source: Noord Hollands
Dagblad)
13. 13
The ArtScience
The ArtScience aspects of the Symbiotic
Machine
The Symbiotic Machine can be seen as an
ArtScience artwork according to the
principle that it is neither a science or art
work but it is the combination of both. This
artwork should thus inspire “open-
mindedness, curiosity, creativity,
imagination, critical thinking and problem
solving through innovation and
collaboration” (Root-Bernstein et al.,
2011). The magic of ArtScience projects
lies in the people that are involved in the
project. Those people can be divided into
two groups, the people that collaborated in
developing the prototype and the public.
In the following section we will elaborate
on the how the collaboration is perceived
by the artist and the scientist.
Working in a transdisciplinary way
Working in a transdisciplinary way stimulates
the transfer of knowledge between the
disciplines. The engineer has to think about
art, the artist has to think about science and
the scientist has to think about robotics etc. In
this set-up everybody learns from each other
because everybody is dependent on each
other in order to make the SM a success.
(Frese, R.N. and Henriques, I., Interview,
2014)
Figure 17:An early idea of the Symbiotic Machine
made by Ivan Henriques
The scientist versus the artist
In an ArtScience project; the scientist has to
remain the scientist, whereas the ArtScience-
artist can switch between the two fields
relatively easy. (Frese, R.N, Interview, 2014).
Ivan wants to remark that “people remain
people with feelings, so it not about
differences but about the similarity”. The
similarity is that everybody involved wants to
achieve pre-set goals. For the artist this goal
can be a meta-goal, while the scientist needs
an exact goal. It is thus a challenge to manage
the expectations of the end-result. (Henriques,
I., Interview, 2014).
The way of working is also different; the artist
The acute problems of the world
can be solved only by whole
men (and women), not by people who
refuse to be, publicly,
anything more than a technologist,
or a pure scientist, or an
artist. In the world of today,
you have got to be everything or
you are going to be nothing.
by Conrad Hal Waddington,
biologist,
philosopher, artist and historian
The ArtScience Project
14. 14
works independently with strict deadlines
(Frese, R.N, Interview, 2014). According to
Ivan art funding organizations usually do not
finance projects for more than a year. In order
to finalize a project the artwork has to “work”
according to the institution who financed and
supported the project. This results in
deadlines which have to be accomplished in
order to finalize the project. (Henriques, I.,
Interview, 2014).
The scientist works as part of an institution
were the quality of the end-result is more
important than the deadline By working as a
scientist in the field of an artist can thus
accelerate the research. The downside is that
the quality of the research may suffer. Being a
scientist is all about maintaining your
reputation as a scientist (Frese, R.N,
Interview, 2014).
The art-aspects
When it comes to art-aspects, Ivan highlights
the different layers of the robot. Thereby the
SM can be considered as a step in evolution
concerning technology. Technology is often
being perceived as something that evolves in
expense of nature. For being positivist and an
utopian artist, Ivan points out that the
technology is not the problem, but the
problem is who designed the technology. In a
way we are all designing the future.
Depending on our imagination we are able to
create a future were buildings are built of
mushrooms instead of bricks, amongst other
inventions. (Henriques, I., Interview, 2014).
“Everything you can imagine is real”
– Pablo Picasso
For Raoul the art-aspects are all the aspects
that contributed in realizing the SM aspect for
the use of biosolar cells in a robot. With
everything else Raoul and Ivan both agree
that the art-exhibition started before the
actual opening. It started when the scientists,
artist and productions specialist were
working in the Glazen Huis to realize the SM
at the exhibition space at the same time.
Figure 18: Art and Science in the Glazen Huis
Art in the public domain
Raoul is working in a field of science were it is
unusually to expose work in the public
domain. The art made it possible to get
research in the public domain before it was
tested throughout in the lab. The exposure in
an early stage of the research can help
accelerate the research because the
researcher has to adapt the speed of working
of the artist in order to meet deadlines.
Furthermore the public awareness can help in
finding funding in order to further develop
the SM. (Frese, R.N, Interview, 2014).
For Ivan it is part of his artist’s life to expose
work in the public domain. For him it is
important that people think about the
implication of his work. Depending on where
on the world the exhibition is the way his
work is perceived differs. It is thus the
perspective that make people perceive the SM
in a certain way, but with the SM people are
inspired to look at it from more perspectives.
And with that it forms a bridge to talk about
important matters in today’s society
(Henriques, I., Interview, 2014)
15. 15
The project in perspective
The link between Art, Creativity and
Innovation
It is a upcoming trend that Art and Science are
combined in order stimulate innovation. The
importance of innovation in a prosperous
society as the Netherlands is that we can use
it to strengthen our competitive position with
new and unique products and services
(Nanopodium, 2012). In order to understand
how art can lead to innovation we need to
understand what innovation means and how
it is linked to creativity and art.
Innovation: “The process of translating an idea
or invention into a good
or service that creates value or for
which customers will pay
“(Businessdictionary, 2014a).
Creativity: “Mental characteristic that allows
a person to think outside of the box,
which results in innovative or different
approaches to a particular task”
(Businessdictionary, 2014c)
Art: “The expression or application of human
creative skill and imagination, typically in a
visual form such as painting or sculpture,
producing works to be appreciated primarily
for their beauty or emotional power”
(Oxforddictionaries, 2014)
Innovation is linked to creativity trough the
word “new”. An application of creativity leads
to innovation. Creativity is linked to art
trough the creation process and originality.
Both a creative person and an artist are
looking for problems and they try to solve
them. A creative idea on its own is not
satisfying if the application and/or
effectiveness is not clear. With art this not
necessary, because it provides entertainment
or a mirror for the society. (Voogel M., 2014)
Art, creativity and innovation are linked with
each other through “change”. Throughout the
process the “activity” is checked for its
relevance within its particular context. The
involvement of art as a driver of innovation is
upcoming. At this moment there is little
scientific information available to support the
potential added value. The question that
needs to be answered is: if the creative
process of art is able to add knowledge and
accelerate creativity for innovation? (Voogel
M., 2014)
Artist driven innovation comes from a
different source compared to the innovation
process. Artists tend to be more interested in
finding new challenges. If the challenge can
get solved within their scope is irrelevant for
them. Their drive to create lies within the
exploration of the defined problem (Voogel
M., 2014)
The link between Art and Science
Art and science are different but is not a
categorical difference. In science facts are
produced.
Science: “Body of knowledge comprising of
measurable or verifiable facts acquired
through application of the scientific method,
and generalized into scientific
laws or principles. While all sciences
are founded on valid reasoning and conform to
the principles of logic, they are not concerned
with the definitiveness of their assertions or
findings. (Businessdictionary, 2014b)”
16. 16
However facts can be undermined by new
research. Science is a never ending quest just
like art. Art produces inspired products that
are unique but not solid. Who can determine
if a color or a note in piece of music is exactly
right? Furthermore there is also aesthetics in
science; a theory in physics can be perceived
as beautiful or elegant.
So even though science and art are different
they are not opposites. The way of working is
different but the current trend of
entanglement creates opening in both
directions. (Nanopodium, 2012)
In the case of the SM the openings are created
for the scientists by the exposure in the public
domain, accelerating their research,
transcending knowledge and by getting out of
their comfort zone. The week before the
exhibition everybody was working in the
Glazen Huis. This was a rather stressful week
in which the different way of working
between the scientist and the artist was
highlighted. The scientists were very focused
on getting the “science” to work. The artist in
his role as a project manager was worried
about the overall end-result of the SM and the
exhibition space (Haveman, M.J.,2014) What
bonds the scientist and the artist together is
that they both want to deliver an “as good as
possible” end-result. This enabled the
scientist to step out of their comfort zone in
order to speed up the research process. The
disadvantage was that the quality of the
research suffered, however in the light of the
mutual goal of the artist and scientist this was
accepted.
After the opening became clear that the SM as
an Algae Powered Robot did not work. This
was a disappointing result for both the
scientist and the artist. The difference herein
is that the artist is able to cope better with
this “set-back”. The artist can focus on all the
other layers of the SM. The scientists has to
remain the scientist. The SM thus shifted from
an APR to a showcase of the possibilities of
using “untreated” photosynthetic material in
biosolar cells. Even though the APR did not
work as an APR, the success of the SM was
marked for both the artist and scientist by the
exposure in the public domain.
How the SM stimulates innovation
Innovation is stimulated by the SM in two
ways. First of all because it enabled people
with backgrounds in different disciplines to
work with each other. This transdisciplinary
way of working stimulates the transcending of
knowledge. Secondly the SM as an artwork
stimulates innovation because of the
following ideas behind it:
• The SM is built with a restricted
budget. A lot of the materials used can be
found in a local DIY
• The SM shows the beauty of simplicity
and its potential to bring across a complex
message.
• The SM stimulated cross-cultural
transdisciplinary collaboration and (Figure 19
shows the activities in the Netherlands)
• It stimulates thinking about the
possibilities of a different future
• It makes people think about robotics
in nature
• It accelerates research
• And more
The SM cannot be positioned as an innovative
device according the definition that it not
translating an idea or invention into a good
or service that creates value or for
which customers will pay.
17. 17
The SM can be seen as an invention that has
the potential of becoming an innovation. The
intention of the SM is also not be an
innovation, but a gateway to stimulate
innovation. This was achieved by creating
synergy between the scientist, the artist and
everybody in-between who collaborated to
make the SM possible. The participants
enriched not only their knowledge, but also
their imagination because the project requires
working in a transdisciplinary way. With the
enrichment of individuals the chances of
finding creative solutions for problems
increases. As Albert Einstein puts it:
“Imagination is more important than
knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we
now know and understand, while imagination
embraces the entire world, and all there ever
will be to know and understand.”
Figure 19: Overview of places in the Netherlands were the Symbiotic Machine was
built
18. 18
Innovation
This paragraph contains more information
about the implications of innovation in society
and how ArtScience can contribute to this. We
have asked innovation-expert Peter van Hoorn
to elaborate on this topic.
The potential of ArtScience
Peter van Hoorn earned his M.Sc.-degree in
Molecular and Medical Microbiology at Groningen
University. He subsequently held director
positions in business development at Gist-
brocades and DSM. From 2002 to 2008 he was
President of Cambrex’s Biopharmaceutical
division. Van Hoorn is currently active at the VU
where he lectures the Bachelor and Master SBI
(science, business and innovation) programs as
well as in various other life sciences Master
programs, on subjects including business &
innovation in the life sciences industry.
Furthermore he is active in a variety of advisory
roles including member of the Green Metropole
initiative in Amsterdam. (FEW-VU, 2014).
According to van Hoorn ArtScience is an
undiscovered field with a lot of potential in
solving great societal problems. Problems in
society often are very complex; they involve a lot
of stakeholders, contradictions and differences in
value propositions. In order to find a solution to
these kind of problems art can play a major role.
Artists have the ability to see problems from a
very different kind of perspective. They tend to
solve problems from a non-rational perspective
which is in contrast to scientists who often start
"calculating" on problems. Therefore ArtScience
can be of great value for the society because it
enables solving problems from a different
perspective, which can enhance the creativity in
the solution (Voogel M., 2014).
“Science + Art = good for society”
An example of an artist that helps solving society’s
problems by making them discussable is Merijn
Bolink. He is a Dutch sculptor, installation artist
and illustrator (Wikipedia, 2014f). In 2010 he was
involved in project where he created an artwork
on the subject of nanoscience and
nanotechnology. With this project the involved
institutes aimed to raise awareness of the societal
implications of nano-applications by making them
visible en discussable for the public (Nanopodium,
2012).
In the view of van Hoorn we are currently in the
“science paradigm”. Our western society tries to
solve every problem empirical. It is almost
impossible to move away from this paradigm.
However it is possible to look at the problems
from different perspectives. The potential of
artists contribution in creating a more completer
world outlook is recognized by Royal Dutch
Academy of Sciences (KNAW) (Makaske, 2014).
In 2013 the KNAW is broadened with the academy
of the arts. According to the president Hans
Clevers;
“individual artists should be giving a
voice in the public debate in order to
contribute to a more completer world
outlook.”
At this moment artists are only involved in the
debate via advisory bodies and trade associations.
Clevers believes it is very logical that artists are
given an individual voice with establishment of a
new institute. (Makaske, 2014).
According to van Hoorn by encouraging
collaboration between science and art we will
enable ourselves to think in a more “out of the
box” way which can lead to many opportunities.
19. 19
In conversation with …
This paragraph contains information
about how participants that are “in-
between” the scientist Raoul Frese and
artist Ivan Henriques, perceived the
ArtScience project. We therefore spoke
with Michiel van Overbeek, Vincent Friebe,
Marcel Pasquina and Wessel van der
Heijden.
1
Why were you involved in the making of
the Symbiotic Machine?
Michiel van Overbeek; I am a physicist and I
am currently specialized in innovation and art
(www.kristal-helder.nl). Ivan asked me to
help making the Symbiotic Machine and I was
responsible for the hardware and software
development and the realization of the
robotics.
Vincent Friebe: I am working as a PhD
student under the guidance of Raoul Frese.
Frese approached me to collaborate on the
Symbiotic Machine and since it sounded like a
cool project I agreed upon.
Marcel Pasquina: I am an exchange student
from Spain. As part of my bachelor degree I
am doing an internship in the Netherlands
under guidance of Raoul Frese. A week before
the opening of the exhibition Frese asked
everyone to help on the robot, since a lot a
work had to be done still. I was one of the
people that helped out in that last week. I also
find the Machine very interesting so I did not
mind spending the extra hours at the Glazen
Huis.
Wessel van der Heijden: I am currently a
master student Science, Business and
Innovation and under the guidance of Raoul
Frese I am working on my science project. The
week before the opening Raoul asked me to
help preparing the Symbiotic Machine.
2
How did you contributed to the Machine?
Michiel van Overbeek: I was involved in the
machine from a multi-disciplinary
perspective. Besides making taking care of the
hardware, software development and the
robotics, I contributed to the design of the
robot and the actual engineering of the robot.
Vincent Friebe: With a background in
biosolar cells and biosensors, I helped
realizing the Machine by creating the biosolar
cell devices in a way that is applicable for the
machine. This basically means that the
biosolar cells should be built in a very
simplistic way. I therefore experimented with
different kind of metals and photosynthetic
material. The choice of photosynthetic
material was based upon the idea of Ivan to
use whatever grows in the ponds. I made this
idea into something concrete and researched
which plant material actually grows in the
Dutch ponds and which of that material could
be used for the Machine. One of the ideas was
to use micro single cellular organism that
grow in ponds. However those organisms
cannot be seen with the naked eye and thus
20. 20
made no sense since it would be used in an
exhibition. So it eventually advised Ivan to use
Spirogyra algae because it grows in
abundance in the Dutch ponds and it is
something people can see and thereby it has
more potential to bring the message across.
Marcel Pasquina: I helped out Ivan and the
other scientists working het Machine. I
contributed in making/testing the grinder of
the Machine, he gave suggestions about the
behavior of the robot and the worked on
finding the best material for the biosolar cells.
Wessel van der Heijden: I helped out on
various things that needed to be done, ranging
from helping to build the electrodes, testing
the solar cells to getting grocery and hanging
the lights.
3
What did you think of the end result of the
Machine?
Michiel van Overbeek:
I think it is an interesting work of art giving
some insights in the world of the artist.
Vincent Friebe:
The end result of the Symbiotic Machine was
not what I expected. It did not reached the set
goals I made at forehand. However it did
reached other goals including the impact of
the Machine, the impression on people, the
entire interconnected functionality of the
Machine, the fact that it worked in way that it
moved and turned independent of the fact
whether or not it made significant
photocurrents. Initially making the actual
photocurrents was the highest goal, however
looked upon from another perspective the
idea of the robot is what matters most.
Other than the experience of working with
such an innovative idea and innovative way of
building it is priceless. The Machine was
based with limited amount of resources
initiating a creative way of working in all
participants. A lot of the material used for the
robot can just be found in a local DIY store.
Marcel Pasquina: The Symbiotic Machine
looked really nice and I am confident of the
fact that the people that visited the exhibition
are surprised to see the robot function. From
a scientific perspective it was not what I
expected, but those problems can be resolved
in another prototype.
Wessel van der Heijden: I am really fond of
the idea of the robot that can autonomously
move. In the beginning of the exhibition I
thought that the most important goal of the
Machine was that it actually works. However
considering the outreach of the project, I am
now convinced that the Machine is successful
as a prototype and that it works from that
perspective. In theoretical form it also works
as an algae powered robot however that is not
measurable.
4
What would you have done differently or
what would you improve on the Machine?
Michiel van Overbeek: Nothing; Ivan is the
artist
Vincent Friebe: Not much
Marcel Pasquina: I believe the bottleneck of
the Machine was the grinder, which formed a
crucial point in making het machine work as
an APR. The peppermill idea of a grinder is
not the best solution and if I could have done
something differently on the robot, I would
have improved the engineering part the robot.
21. 21
Wessel van der Heijden: The biggest
bottleneck of the Machine is to let it work as
an APR is the functionality of the grinder, the
pumping in of algae and the searching for
algae.
5
What do you think of the success of the
Symbiotic Machine as an ArtScience
artwork?
Michiel van Overbeek: Scientist may get
inspiration from it; I think the machine itself
is largely a work of (kinetic) art.
Vincent Friebe: From an ArtScience point of
view the success is enormous
Marcel Pasquina: From an ArtScience
perspective the robot was a success. With the
robot people with no science background are
enabled to get involved in science which is
one of the major advantages of an ArtScience
object like the Machine
Wessel van der Heijden: I believe the
Symbiotic machine is a success from an
ArtScience perspective. The robot represents
a good example of an object where science
and art are combined. And even though it is
presented as an art object, without the science
the art object could not have exist. So the
robot could not have been a success if the art
or science would have missed.
6
What do you think of the success of the
Symbiotic Machine as an Algae Powered
Robot?
Michiel van Overbeek: I do not think it is an
algae powered robot; the power generated by
the algae (if any) is marginal. It is a concept
(or idea) of an algae powered robot.
Vincent Friebe: From an APR perspective is a
bit disappointing, but that is good because it
leaves more work to do. I also see the APR
perspective broader than just the robot eating
algae autonomously. From an applicable,
realistic-use perspective it also a bit
disappointing because it in the way the APR is
presented now it cannot really solve a
problem other than removing algae from
ponds. However the APR forms a gateway to
something that can be useful like, bio-
herbicide detection, checking water quality,
checking biodiversity etc.
Marcel Pasquina: From an APR perspective
the Machine was a bit disappointing. As
mentioned before the engineering part could
have been better and from a science
perspective the Machine lacked of evidence to
actual proof that the concept worked.
Wessel van der Heijden: In theory the idea is
great; however the execution of the idea can
use some improvements. However the most
important thing is that the first step to make it
a functional robot has been made and
complex ideas, as the robot never succeed in
the first try.
7
What do you think are the innovative
aspects of the Machine?
Michiel van Overbeek:
The idea of making a self-containing robot (in
water), looking for food and doing just that.
Normally machines are made to perform
some useful task, this machine just lives,
22. 22
that's all. It is a beautiful concept. There might
be some innovative aspects in the design of
the electrodes (not my field, so I don't know).
Vincent Friebe: The innovative aspects of the
Machine are that it is a gateway to novel ideas
and innovations. What is also remarkable is
that the primary goal of the Machine to be an
energy harvester became a sub-goal in the
end. Other things can be incorporated in this
machine, like bio-herbicide detection,
checking water quality, checking biodiversity,
trash cleaner, fish population monitor etc.
Marcel Pasquina: I find that the innovative
aspect is that is a completely new idea
wherein science is connected with the beauty
of life, robotics and also the beauty of art.
Wessel van der Heijden: Innovative aspects
of the Machine are that simple material has
been used to make a robot that could generate
energy. From this perspective it offers
potential to rural areas, where generating
electricity is a problem, but the sun is in
abundance. From a scientific perspective the
Machine initiate an impulse to further
investigate the use of biosolar cells.
8
With the knowledge of today, would you
have made the same decision when asked
to help with the making the Machine and
why?
Michiel van Overbeek: Yes, the cooperation
was fruitful, interesting and fun.
Vincent Friebe: Definitely!
Marcel Pasquina: It is a very promising idea
and therefore I would not have wanted to
miss working on it.
Wessel van der Heijden: Even though it was
a bit of a chaotic week, I would not have want
missed the opportunity to work on the
Machine. I think it is very special that science
so quickly can become part of the public
domain. It therefore is a beautiful project and
a gateway for the public to be introduced to
science, like in the workshops. By presenting
science in a clear and simple way you will be
amazed to see how enthusiastic people can
get
9
Conclusion
The above interviews reveals a bit about the
perspectives of the participants. It becomes
clear that Michiel van Overbeek can be
positioned as more an artist than a scientist.
He perceives the SM not as an APR but only as
an artwork. With his background in art and
innovation he is aware of how the SM is able
to inspire the scientist, but also the public. In
comparison we see that Vincent Friebe was
very focused on making the SM as an APR a
success. After this did not worked out Vincent
shift his focus. The attention that the SM
received in the public domain was for him
unexpected and it made him realize that the
idea of the SM is more important than the
actual functionality. The other students
Marcel Pasquina and Wessel van der Heijden
are in line with Vincent; the SM is gateway for
thinking about the useful applications of an
APR in society.
I believe that the drive for Vincent to make
the SM a success as an APR lies within the fact
that he is a PhD student who needs scientific
publications in order to succeed. This drive
was not among the other students; for them it
was a fun project to be part of for a short
period of time.
23. 23
Conclusion
In the previous pages a lot have become clear
regarding the ArtScience project. In this project artist
Ivan Henriques and scientist Raoul Frese have worked
together to create the Symbiotic Machine. They were
supported by important key factors including Vincent
Friebe, Michiel van Overbeek and Xavier Leydervan.
Everybody involved in the project was aimed to make
the Symbiotic Machine a success. This mind-set
enabled the participants to move out of their comfort
zone. Especially the scientists had to adjust to work in
the field of arts. In the field of arts there are strict
deadlines. In order to meet those deadlines the
scientists had to speed up the research. Accelerating
research can have advantages; its saves time and effort.
The disadvantage is that the quality of the research
suffers; conclusions can be drawn on insufficient
information or the obtained information is not useful.
I believe that the biggest advantage of working in
ArtScience project is that all participants are working
in a transdisciplinary way. Transcending information
between disciplines can contribute to a broader
perspective. This stimulates out-of-the-box thinking
which can lead to innovations.
This ArtScience project also made clear that the
difference between the scientist and the artist is not
explicit. Both are trying to find solutions for problems,
the way of working is what differentiates them. The
artist reflects on the end-result from a holistic
perspective. It is not the individual parts that matter,
but the implication of the Machine as a whole. The
scientists took responsibility for the science part:
making the Symbiotic Machine an Algae Powered
Robot. When talking about the SM they need to remain
the scientist and thus need to reflect on whether or not
the SM is an APR.
That the SM could not be positioned as an APR was
thus a disappointment for both. However the artist is
able to cope better with this set-back, because the
artist can shift focus. Taking in consideration the
amount of time, funding that was available the SM still
satisfies being an outstanding result of the ArtScience
project. This was highlighted by the attention it
received in the public domain which included an
honorary mention at the PRIX ARS Electronica and
airtime on Discovery Channel Canada. And even though
that the SM was not able to harvest photosynthetic
material, children who attended the workshops were
able to replicate what the SM was expected to do. They
showed that the principle on which the SM is based
works by making their own “working” bio solar cells.
Personal statement
I believe we should promote ArtScience projects in
society because it stimulates perceiving the world from
a more broader perspective. I feel that in today’s
society we focus so much on the parts, that we forget
the whole. By dividing the academics into faculties, we
forget to see how all faculties are related, by dividing
the healthcare into departments, we tend to forget that
a cure for a disease can be found in other departments
of where the disease is categorized. In other words by
promoting the multi- disciplinarity, we will start
finding solutions that transcend the box of where the
problem has been put in.
As an Science, Business and Innovation student I have
looked at the SM as an ArtScience object in all its
different perspectives, however for being a science
student I will devote the remaining parts of the report
on the science aspects of the SM, whereby I will take a
short outlook into the business aspect of the
knowledge based on biosolar cells. In the appendix 6.0
I have described my activities concerning my science
project that was based on the Symbiotic Machine.
- Marjolein Shiamatey
24. 24
The biosolar cell
The Science
The proof of principle
The biosolar cell is made of two electrodes
and between them a layer of photosynthetic
material. In the case of the robot the
electrodes are made out of gold and copper
mash. When light shines on the solar cell the
photosynthetic material will create electrons
that can be “captured” by the solar cells to
create a voltage and current which can be
used to charge a battery.
With the Symbiotic Machine a proof of
principle was tested. A proof of principle is to
proof that an idea that in principle works,
actually works. In the case of the Symbiotic
Machine the idea was to show that biosolar
cells work with untreated grinded plant
material. To show this an “algae powered
robot” was created. Unfortunately the APR
was not able to harvest plant material due to
construction faults. Instead the proof of
principle was shown in the workshop given
for children. They created biosolar cells that
were tested by using a voltmeter.
Photosynthesis
The biosolar cells in the machine are based on
photosynthesis. Photosynthesis is the process
of converting sunlight into energy and oxygen.
It therefore needs carbon dioxide, water and
light. This is a simple way of explaining
photosynthesis but the magic occurs on a
level that cannot be seen with the naked eye.
On a microscopic level different protein
complexes work together to convert sunlight
into energy.
The conversion begins with the reaction
center (RC): photosystem 2 (PS2), which
contain the green pigments (in green
plants).The other RC is photosystem 1 (PS1).
The RC’s are able to capture sunlight and
redirect it to other protein complexes. What is
very special is that the RC’s are able to do this
with an efficiency of 100%, meaning that no
energy gets lost during the conversion of
sunlight into the movement of electrons.
(Yehezkeli, 2014).
When light hits the RC an electron transfer
chain is initiated. With the movement of
electrons the plant is able to start processes in
which energy is transformed into sugars. To
do this the plant uses several protein
complexes including PS1 and PS2. This thus
means that the electron has to travel from
complex to complex. To help the electron
several mediators (such as plastoquinon,
plastocyanin and ferredoxin) are used. These
are small molecules that can carry the
electron from complex to complex.
The first complex in this chain is PS2 where
oxygen and hydrogen is generated by the
splitting of water (it is called PS2 because it
was discovered later than PS1). The electron
then moves to PS1 where it is re-energized by
the sunlight again. The electron then has
enough power to convert NADP+ to NADPH
(using the hydrogen produced in PS2).
NADPH is the last mediator in the electron
transfer chain and it carries the energy into
the dark cycle where the sugar is produced
that plant needs to grow (It is called dark
The Background
25. 25
Why research photosynthesis?
According to Raoul Frese " Scientists are researching photosynthesis and photosynthetic organisms to learn
how processes occur from the nanoscale and femtoseconds to the scale of the organism or ecosystem on days
and years. It is an excellent example how a life process is interconnected from the molecules to organism to
interrelated species. For biophysicists, the process exemplifies molecular interactions upon light absorption,
energy transfer and electron and proton transfers. Such processes are researched with the entire experimental
physics toolbox and described by theories such as thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. From a
technological point of view, we can learn from the process how efficient solar energy conversion can take place,
especially from the primary, light dependent reactions and how light absorption can result in the creation of a
fuel (and not only electricity). (WeMakeMoneyNotArt, 2014)"
cycle because no direct sunlight is needed).
Figure 14: Process of photosynthesis
In this process of photosynthesis sugar is
produced whereby oxygen is created as a
byproduct.
The beauty of photosynthesis has inspired
many scientists to investigate the practical
applications of photosynthesis. One of the
directions this field is heading to is to use the
light-harvesting and electron transportation
elements in photo-bioelectrochemical cells
(Yehezkeli, 2014). The idea behind the cells is
that the individual complexes like PS1 and
PS2, with help of the mediators generate
electricity on its own (it creates a movement
of electrons when exposed to light). The flow
of electrons; creating electricity, can be
captured by using electrode surfaces and thus
creating biosolar cells (Yehezkeli, 2014).
When this application was discovered two
decades ago George Feher said the following:
“Who knows, maybe on day
Silicon Valley will turn into the
RC valley”. (George Feher)
The new way of preparing biosolar cells
A big step was made in realizing this idea by
Magis et al., 2010). Their research showed
that the photosynthetic material derived from
bacteria could generate electricity by using a
“simple” preparation. This means in the eyes
of scientists that the material was untreated,
but to optimize the photocurrent per cm2 the
membranes were filtered out and mediators
were added. In order to optimize the
photocurrent scientists use a lot of “tricks”
whereby scientists always start with
extracting the reaction centers from the
membrane. This research showed that even in
the membrane the RC and mediators are able
to transfer electrons to an electrode.
Frese’s research grooup took this idea to the
next level. In the lab they showed that grinded
plant material could directly be used as
photosynthetic material on the biosolar cells.
So without the addition of mediators the cells
can generate a photocurrent and
photovoltage. In the Symbiotic Machine this
idea is transformed into the creation of an
algae powered robot that in theory is able
autonomously carry out the actions needed to
release and utilize the photosynthetic
material of the algae. (Frese, e-mail
communication, 2014).
Figure 13: A leave
from a plant
26. 26
This idea was put to the test when children in
workshops got the opportunity to create their
own biosolar cells in the same way as in the
Machine. The children therefore made two
layers of electrodes and attached them to each
other with tape acquired from a local DIY.
After this the children needed to collect
photosynthetic material from algae or
spinach. The plants were than grinded using a
mortar and pestle. After this the “artistic”
biosolar cells were tested by attaching it to a
voltmeter. The results of these “home-made
biosolar” cells where impressive. A couple of
biosolar cells generated a photocurrent
between 30 and 40mV. In comparison one
PS1 generates a photocurrent of 800mV while
directing the electron to the mediators
(Yehezkeli, 2014). By using untreated
photosynthetic material in a non-optimal
made biosolar cell a lot of energy gets lost
because of factors such as that RC’s that are
not aligned in the most optical way or the
electrodes that are not made in the best
condition and distance between them
possible. But even though all this shortfalls an
amazing 30 – 40 mV could be generated
The
Research
Investigation at the VU
In order to utilize the potential of the biosolar
cells research is required. The potential is that
one PS2 in plants can create a 1.2 voltage
because they can split water into hydrogen
and oxygen. This process requires 1.2
voltages. The problem is that much energy
gets “lost” when trying to capture this energy.
In order to try to capture the maximum
amount of energy a lot of research is
conducted by inter alia researchers from the
laserLaB of the VU University Amsterdam.
One of the things they look at is that in
principle all photosynthetic materials can be
used to complete the biosolar cell. There is
however a great difference between
organisms. For example bacteria are
preferred in the laboratory because they are
easy to handle. Different samples are tested to
discover which species generates the highest
voltage and currents (Delgado, personal
communication, 2014).
Furthermore there is a great variation in
material that can be used for the electrodes.
The only requirement is that it should be
conductive in order to be able to function as
an electrode. Materials with high conductivity
include silver, gold, platinum etc. (Delgado,
personal communication, 2014).
Thereby the surface profile of the material is
also something that is taken into account
since it can increase the voltage and current
flow. By making the surface for example
rough it will increase the surface area. The
more surface area the more electrons in
theory can be produced (Delgado, personal
communication, 2014).
Another way to increase the photocurrent is
to manipulate the way the photosystems are
attached on the surface. The photosystems
produce current in a certain way, if two
photocurrents are produced in opposite
direction they cancel out. Therefore the
Langmuir Blodgett Film is applied to create a
strip of photosystems attached all in the same
direction. This technique makes use of the
hydrophobic and hydrophilic properties of
the photosystems, whereby they will self-
organize on the water. If then a substrate (for
27. 27
example a golden electrode) is added, the
photosystems will get attached in a particular
direction. This is called dipping. This dipping
goes really slow with a speed of about 2.5
millimeter per minute (Delgado, personal
communication, 2014).
Other ways to overcome the bottlenecks of
the biosolar include channeling the electrons
from PS1 with nano-size wire to the electrode.
Another option is to evaporate the water in
PS1 to make crystals. Those crystals can last
for years. Furthermore the PS1 can be added
up more easily and thereby increasing the
potential generated voltage significantly.
Furthermore chemicals can be used to make
them aligned properly. The major problem
however is that beside a high voltage you also
need a photocurrent to close the circuit.
Furthermore the efficiency can also be
improved by finding ways to increase the
spectrum used for photosynthesis. With a
wider spectrum more photons can be
captured and translated into energy. Plants
use only half of the spectrum.
At the VU University Amsterdam all these
variations in making biosolar cells are
investigated in order to increase the
generated photovoltage and photocurrents
(Delgado, personal communication, 2014).
Hands-on
testing
Creating photovoltage and photocurrent of
“hand-made” biosolar cells
Biosolar cells play a big part in the Symbiotic
Machine and were used in the workshops. In
order to optimize the solar cells used several
small experiments were conducted. The tests
took place in the Glazen Huis which is not the
optimal place to conduct lab experiments.
However the actual workshops were also
given in the Glazen Huis in the same
circumstances. One of the tests that were
conducted was to see how much voltage and
current the biosolar cells generate. This was
done on the 4th of March 2014, a few days
before the opening of the exhibition.
In this test the scientist investigated the
following hypothesis:
Photosynthetic material from Spirogyra algae
can generate a photocurrent and photovoltage
that can be captured by the use of a biosolar
cell.
In order investigate this a biosolar cell made
from a golden working electrode and a copper
mash counter electrode was used. The
biosolar cell was then exposed to different
inputs such as clear water, pond water, pond
water with algae, with light and in dark. The
photocurrent and photovoltage was then
measured.
We found that the effect of putting
photosynthetic material of Spirogyra algae on
the solar cells could generated an extra 90nA.
Furthermore the highest mV that was
measured was 3.1 mV. The full experiment
can be found in the appendix 2.0.
Making and testing biosolar cells in this way
was later repeated by children in the
workshops given in the Glazen Huis.
28. 28
Figure 16: biosolar cell made in workshop for
children
With this penguin we measured a 40.2 mV.
More about the workshops can be found on
www.raoulfrese.nl/the-symbiotic-machine.
Finding the best combination of the
electrodes for biosolar cells
Another experiment conducted in order to
optimize the biosolar cells was looking at the
combination of electrodes for the cells. In the
robot a golden and copper electrodes were
used, but different conductive metals can do
the job as well. Another way to improve the
output of the biosolar cell is to put it in series.
The question the scientists asked is stated as
followed:
What are the best electrodes to optimize
voltage and current in the biosolar cells and
how does putting the biosolar cells in series
influence the voltage and current?
These tests were also conducted in the Glazen
Huis. The tests showed that the combination
of copper with copper are the best electrodes
for a biosolar cell. Putting the copper-copper
biosolar cell is series showed that it added up
the voltage, but in expense of the current. By
making an I, V curve of the copper-copper
biosolar cell also made visible that much
improvement is still need to improve the
power of the cell.
With that we concluded that we were not able
to power a device with the made biosolar cells
in the workshop. However to show that it
actual works we used a voltmeter to test each
cell individually, with surprising result of cell
that were able to generate over 30 mV.
The full experiment can be found in the
appendix 2.0
The Market
Be price competitive
To make use of biosolar cells on a large scale
it needs to compete with all the other solar
cells including the silicon solar cells we can
put on our rooftop. In order to compete it
needs perform better. And according to
Delgado the biggest bottleneck for the
biosolar cell is that it is not able to last 20
years like the silicon solar cells. The material
used in the biosolar cells is fragile and will
degrade. However the advantage is that it is
widely available and almost for free. But if you
put this in perspective with the current
efficiency of the biosolar cells you will need
many trees to power a simple device.
In order to reduce the price many pathways
are available.
1. First of all the way how to prepare the
photosynthetic material should be
reduced to simple steps, but at the
same time retain the optimal
orientation and condition of the
material. This is having many PS1
aligned in the right orientation with
high density, so dirt and the liquid
should be eliminated.
2. Secondly it should be durable and
robust in order to make it easier to
handle the material and to lower the
time of replacement.
29. 29
Figure 17: Plant-E
3. Thirdly the efficiency should be
increased. PS1 in nature is a hundred
percent efficient however as stated
before; it is difficult to capture all
generated electrons.
Alternative uses of the principle
Biosensors
The solar cells in the Symbiotic Machine are
based on the fact that photosynthetic material
releases electrons when exposed to light.
These electrons are than captured by the
electrodes creating a current and voltage that
can be used to power device.
Another field of investigation, that makes use
of the principle that organic material can
release electrons, is the field of biosensors. In
biosensors organic material is used that
reacts with a particular protein that needs be
detected. A good example of a biosensor is the
glucose meter. With this device diabetes
patients can measure their glucose level by
adding a drop of blood on biological
component. This biological component
combined with the physicochemical detector
will show the patient what their glucose level
is (Wikipedia, 2014b). On the biological
component there is an enzyme with a
mediator that reacts with sugar and releases
electrons. The number of electrons is directly
related to the amount of sugar there is in the
blood. With the biosensor a patient can thus
check instantly and several times a day what
their glucose level is. This enables patient to
closely monitor their disease and make them
able to live a healthier life.
This revolutionary use of organic material in
biosensors initiated a new research field. At
this moment biosensors are developed for all
sorts of applications. At the VU University
Amsterdam scientists are working on a
biosensor that can detect Atrazine in water.
Atrazine is an herbicide that is dangerous for
human beings. Atrazine, mainly found in the
USA, is detected in drinking water causing
dangerous situation for the people living in
the polluted areas (Friebe, personal
communication, 2014).
Plant-E
Another way of using electrons produced by
organic material is in the technology of Plant-
E. This technology makes use of the electrons
that are released in the soil by (house) plants.
Those electrons are originated from organic
matter that is produced via photosynthesis in
the plant. An excess of produced organic
matter is excreted by the plants into the soil
via the roots. Naturally present micro-
organisms will break down the organic
compounds to gain energy. In this process,
electrons are released as a waste product.
Plant-E has found a way to capture the
electrons by providing an electrode for the
micro-organisms to donate their electrons to
and thereby creating electricity (Plant-E,
2014).
30. 30
The Energy Harvester
The energy harvester is part of the Symbiotic
Machine and is based on the principle of a
switched mode converter. A switched mode
converter is capable of converting an input
voltage (Vin) into an adjustable output
voltage (Vout). It uses a boost converter in
order to make Vout greater than Vin. (Vout >
Vin). So Vin can be 3.3 V and by going through
the switched mode converter Vout will be 5V.
This principle is something from the last 15
years and is able to work because if its high
conversion efficiency. (YouTube, 2014).
The switched mode converter makes use of a
reference voltage (Vref). Vref is related to
the desired output voltage. It forms the
feedback needed in order for the brain
(controller) to adjust the system.
The Vref is thus connected to the controller
that takes the error between the reference
voltage and the scaled voltage coming out of
the boost converter. So it checks the error
between what we have (Vout) and what we
want (Vref). It response to that error by
changing the duty cycle (D). The duty cycle
refers to the period of time when a signal is
high. A D of 10% means that 10% of time the
signal is high (Amplimo, 2014).
The boost converter1 makes it possible to
scale up the incoming voltage. Since power (P
= VI) must be conserved, the output current is
lower than the source current (Wikipedia,
2014e). The boost converter consists out of an
inductor, a diode, a switch and a capacitor.
The input to the boost converter is the duty
cycle and Vin. The output is the Vout. The
controller regulates the output of the boost
converter by adjusting the duty cycle.
(YouTube, 2014).
So the output voltage will depend on the duty
cycle which is regulated by the controller. The
controller therefore adjusts the input
variations and variation in the load that is
connected to the boost converter. It also
makes sure the output voltage stays constant.
There also is a voltage divider that takes the
output voltage and scales it by a value that
depends on two resistors. That scaled version
of Vout is part of the feedback loop that is
compared to Vref. From this comparison an
error can be detected which is used as an
input for the controller.
1
The real magic happens in the boost converter
which is based on the principle of an inductor that
resists changes in current by creating and
destroying a magnetic field.1 In a boost converter
a switch is used to manage the current flow
through the inductor. In case of a closed switch
energy is stored in the inductor by generating a
magnetic field. When the switch is open the
current is reduced and the magnetic field created
earlier will be destroyed to maintain the current
flow toward the load. By doing this two sources
will be in series causing a higher voltage that will
charge the capacitor. 1Figure 18: Schematic overview of the
switched mode converter.
31. 31
If the error is positive; which means that Vref
is higher than the scaled version of Vout, then
Vout is too low and the controller will adjust
the duty cycle to make Vout go higher.
If the error is negative; which means that the
Vref is lower than scaled version of Vout, then
Vout is too high, the controller will then
adjust the duty cycle to reduce the Vout.
The LTC3108 that is used in the Symbiotic
Machine makes use of a chip that has the
voltage reference, the controller and voltage
divider built in to them. This device comes
together with an inductor and capacitor
which makes the energy harvester complete
and is able to boost voltage inputs as low as
mV into Volts (YouTube, 2014). More about
how the LTC3108 works can be found in the
appendix 4.0.
32. 32
The Spirogyra Algae
The food of the Machine
Vincent Friebe proposed to focus on Spirogyra
algae as a photosynthetic organism since they
are visible to the human and are grow
excessive during the summer. Spirogyra algae
are a genus of filamentous green algae, which
can be found in freshwater such as canals and
ponds. The algae are very common in the
Netherlands and are perceived as a weed that
in an ideal way is removed to keep the ponds
fresh. During summertime Dutch ponds are
full of this type of algae because when they
there is enough sunlight and warmth they
produce large amounts of oxygen, adhering
bubbles between the tangled filaments. The
filamentous masses come to the surface and
become visible as slimy green mats
(WeMakeMoneyNotArt, 2014).
Figure 19: Spirogyra algae
In order for the Machine to “hack” Spirogyra
algae, the algae need to be broken down. This
is done by the grinder that is based on a
pepper mill. The grinder breaks down the
algae whereby also the cell’s membranes are
being broken down, releasing the micro
particles such as PS1, and PS2. The broken
down algae form a “green juice” that is
pumped into the Machine and is directed to
the solar cells (WeMakeMoneyNotArt, 2014).
Researching ways to maintain the food
After the choice was made to focus on
Spirogyra algae another challenge began. The
algae type happens to visible in ponds only
during the summer time. The exhibition of the
Machine was however during winter time.
Furthermore the algae had to be able to
survive a seven week indoor exhibition.
Weeks before the exhibition some algae
samples were acquired from the Hortus
Botanicus in Delft. We have kept them in
different condition in Ivan’s working place in
Den Hague. We soon discovered that the algae
that were under normal daylight in fresh
water and in pond water were dying fast. The
algae that were under TL-light and LED light
were making bubbles, meaning that they
received enough light to be able to float. After
a few weeks having the algae in these
circumstances the conclusion was drawn that
TL-light and LED light should work for the
exhibition to keep the algae alive in the indoor
pool. Because of the price difference in both
light sources the choice was made for TL-
light. More on the test conducted at Ivan’s
working place can be found in the appendix
3.0.
Even though our effort to find a way to
maintain the Spirogyra algae in the Glazen
Huis it did not worked out as we expected.
The algae did not receive enough light in
order to start producing oxygen. The algae
thus sank to the bottom of the pool where
they slowly turned brown.
33. 33
The quality of a light source is dependent on
the spectrum and the intensity. Light from the
sun for instance sends out a wide range of
“light colors”. Green plants grow when they
perceive enough red a blue-violet light. Green
light is not used by the plant and is reflected
back and that is why plants are green. From
this perspective LED would have been a
better choice because its spectrum is wider
compared to TL-light.
The intensity of the light says something
about how much energy the light source is
able to give to the plant. In other words the
closer the light source is to the plant the more
energy is transferred to the plant. Light that is
too intense can destroy the process of
photosynthesis and too low intensity of light
will not initiate photosynthesis. The optimal
light intensity was found in the literature.
With that information the light intensity was
measured in the Glazen Huis and from the
light sources. The conclusion was that the TL-
lights should hang a maximum of about 50cm
above the pool in order to have an effect.
The literature also gave information about
ways to stimulate the growth of Spirogyra
algae. We found that this algae type grows
best in soil water and that different products
could be added to the water in order to
stimulate growth. They also need a period of
dark and the most optimal artificial light
source is LED. More information on the
literature research can be found in the
appendix 5.0.
Finding the food
We collected valuable information about ways
to maintain Spirogyra algae in the Glazen Huis
during the exhibition. The only problem left to
solve at this moment in time was to find the
algae. When the idea arose of using Spirogyra
algae they were widely available because it
was summer. Weeks before the exhibition it
was winter and outside algae has sank to the
bottom. The only chance of finding these algae
was in places where they have indoor ponds
like they have in a Hortus Botanicus. Hortus
Botanicus’s all over the Netherlands were
contacted in order to find algae with success.
We made appointments to collect algae in the
Hortus Botanicus from Amsterdam, Leiden
and Delft. With their help the Symbiotic
Machine was able to swim in a pool for seven
weeks filled with its “food”.
34. 34
Literature
Amplimo., (2014). Duty cycle. Consulted at (18-05-2014) from:
http://www.amplimo.nl/index.php/transformatoren/194-duty-cycle
Atmel. AT89S8253: 8-bit Microcontroller with 12 Kbyte Flash. Retrieved at 7 March 2014 from
http://www.atmel.com/Images/doc3286.pdf
BioSolarCells. (2014). “Measuring the Photosynthetic phenome”. Consulted at 22 June 2014 from:
http://www.biosolarcells.nl
Bosschaert. T. (2011). Artificial light guide. www.excpect.nl. Retrieved from:
http://www.except.nl/nl/#.nl.articles.92-led-artificial-light-guide
Businessdictionary. (2014a), “Innovation”. Consulted at 25 June 2014
from: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/innovation.html#ixzz35YimAmIq
Businessdictionary. (2014b), “Science”. Consulted at 25 June 2014
from: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/science.html#ixzz35YuHBrEk
Businessdictionary. (2014c), “Creativity”. Consulted at 25 June 2014
from: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/science.html#ixzz35YuHBrEk
Campbell. T. The Right Lighting for Photosynthesis Which Wavelengths are Most Important and Why? A Blue LED
White Paper. Retrieved from at 8-2-2014: http://growblu.com/led-grow-lights-perfect-spectrum
Carolina Biological Supply (1978). Algae. Retrieved at 8-4-2014 from:
http://portal.esc20.net/portal/page/portal/doclibraryroot/publicpages/LivingScience/LSHandouts/LMP-
007Algae.pdf
Chameleon grow systems. PAR. Retrieved from at 8 feb 2014.
http://chameleongrowsystems.com/Chameleon_Grow_Systems/Photosynthetic_Photon_Flux_(PPF).html
Culturing Algae (1978), Carolina Biological Supply
Davis, S., (2010). Ultra-Low-Voltage Input Power Converters Support Energy Harvesting. Power Electronics
Technology
Delgado, D., (27-03-2014) Personal communication
FEW-VU, (2014) staff: Peter van Hoorn. Consulted at (18-05-2014) from:
http://www.few.vu.nl/nl/onderzoek/science-business-and-innovation/staff/hoorn.asp
Frese, R. N., (17-05-2014) E-mail communication.
Frese, R. N., (12-06-2014) Interview
Friebe, V., (17-03-2014) Personal communication.
35. 35
Fuad Salem Eshaq e. al., 2010. Spirogyra biomass a renewable source for biofuel (bioethanol) Production.
International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Graham, J.M., Lembi, C. A., Adrian, H. L. and Spencer. D. F., (1995). Physiological responses to temperature and
irradiance in spirogyra (zygnematales, charophyceae). J. Phycol. 31, 532-542.
Haveman, M.J.,(2014). “the art of nanotechnology” Consulted at 25 June 2014
http://www.quaartquascience.nl/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/Uitgaven/Nov_2010_NANO.pdf
Henriques, I., (12-03-2014) Personal communication.
Henriques, I., (19-05-2014) E-mail communication.
Henriques, I., (4-04-2014) Personal communication.
Henriques, I., (14-06-2014) Interview via Skype
Linear Technology. LTC3103: Ultralow Voltage Step-Up Converter and Power Manager. Retrieved at 7 March 2014
from http://cds.linear.com/docs/en/datasheet/3103f.pdf
LumiGrow. (2012). Guide to Specifying LED Lighting. Retrieved from 8-2-2014: http://www.lumigrow.com/grow-
with-us/
Magis G. J., den Hollander. M., Onderwater W. G., Olsen J. D., Hunter, C. N.,Thijs J., Aartsma T, J.,
Frese, R.N., (2010). Light harvesting, energy transfer and electron cycling of a native photosynthetic membrane
adsorbed onto a gold surface. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1798: 637–645 (Magis et al., 2010)
Makaske (2014). Het dwaze idee van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen. Consulted at (18-05-
2014) from:
http://www.makaske.nl/weblog/index.php/index.php?itemid=2436
Microsharp (2011). Light Management for Algae. Retrieved from at 8-2-2014: Growth
http://www.microsharp.co.uk/index.php/illumination-for-algae-growth.html
Nanopodium. (2012) “De kunst van Nanotechnologie” Consulted at 23 June 2014 from
http://www.nanopodium.nl/CieMDN/content/Verslag_kunst_van_nanotechnologie_290510.pdf
Overbeek, M., (10-03-2014) E-mail communication.
Oxforddictionaries. (2014), “Art”. Consulted at 25 June 2014
from: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/art
Plant-e (2014). Technology. Consulted at 28-03-2014 from: http://plant-e.com/technology.html
Prix2014, Prixwinner, Consulted at 16-06-2014 from: http://prix2014.aec.at/prixwinner/13928/
Root-Bernstein, B., Siler, T. , Brown A., Snelson, K., ArtScience: Integrative Collaboration
to Create a Sustainable Future. Leonardo; Volume 44, Number 3, June 2011
p. 192.
36. 36
Salim, M., 2012. , Biomass and Lipid Content of Heterotrophic Spirogyra sp by Using Cassava Starch Hydrolysate;
International Journal of Engineering Research and Development, Volume 6, Issue 6 (November 2012), PP. 21-26
Simons. J., and Beem van A.P., (1990). Spirogyra species and accompanying algae from pools and ditches in the
Netherlands.
Thefreedictionary (2014). Symbiosis. Consulted at 01–05–2014 from: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/symbiosis
Voogel M., (2014). “Waar ontmoeten kunst, creativiteit en innovatie elkaar?” Consulted at 21 June 2014 from:
http://www.creativemv.nl/waar-ontmoeten-kunst-creativiteit-en-innovatie-elkaar
We Make Money Not Art. (2014). Symbiotic Machine, the photosynthetic robot that feeds on algae. Consulted at (4-
04-2014) from: http://we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2014/04/symbiotic-machine.php#.U3kyyvl_uVM
Wikipedia (2014). Kleurenspectrum. Retrieved from at 8-2-2014: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zichtbaar_spectrum
Wikipedia (2014b). Biosensor. Consulted at 04-03-2014 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosensor
Wikipedia (2014c). Color Rendering Index. Retrieved from 8-2-2014:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index
Wikipedia (2014d). Einstein. Retrieved from at 8-2- 2014: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_(unit)
Wikipedia (2014e) Boost converter. Consulted at (18-05-2014) from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boost_converter
Wikipedia, (2014f).Merijn Bolink. Consulted at (18-05-2014) from: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merijn_Bolink
Wulanmanuhara, Y and Wulanmanuhara S. (2013). Effect of salinity and Gandasil-d on Spirogyra Hyalina Biomass in
Non-aerated culture. Journal of applied hytotechnology in environmental sanitation: Volume 2 number 2: 53-58
Yehezkeli , O., Tel-Vered, R., Michaeli, D., Willner, I., Nechushtai, R., (2014). Photosynthetic reaction center-
functionalized electrodes for photo-bioelectrochemical cells. Photosynth Res:120:71–85
Youtube (2014). Switch-mode Boost Converter Part 1. Consulted at (18-05-2014) from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTmYvyVSI2g
37. 37
Appendix
The robot is made out of the following pieces:
• Motor
• Grinder
• Hoses
The motor
The motor that is used for this robot
is originated from a drill. The motor
is powered by a normal battery. Its
main function is to activate the
grinder and pump in/out water from
the robot.
Figure 21: The motor
The grinder
The grinder consists out of three parts: the screw, the
head and the ring. The algae that are pumped in will first
reach the screw. The screw will direct the algae to the
head that is surrounded by the ring. The head and the ring
will work together to grind the incoming algae like a
peppermill.
Figure 23: Head and ringFigure 22: Head and screw
• Valve
• Outer bowl
• Inner bowl
• Solar cells
• Sensors
• Wing
• Small motor
• Battery
• Electronics
Figure 24: Grinder plus motor
Grinder plus motor
The motor plus the grinder forms the “mouth” of the robot. At the
location were the grinder is, there is an opening where algae can
come in. With the power of the motor the algae will be grinded and
pumped through a hose into the robot.
The hoses and valve
The grinder is connected to a hose that is on its turn connected to the
valve. The valve is connected to two hoses. Depending on the input
the valve will close/open one of the two hoses.
Figure 26: The valve in Machine
Figure 25: The valve
1.0 The mechanics of the Symbiotic Machine
38. 38
The inner and outer bowl
The core of the robot consist out of
two bowls. The outer bowl has the
pasted solar cells. The grinded algae
will be directed by the valve into the
outer bowl where the grinded algae
will become part of the solar cell.
The inner bowl functions as a bath
to collect the used algae from the
outer bowl. Once the robot decides
it wants to clean the algae on the
solar cell it will pump in water into
the outer bowl. The outer bowl will
get an overload of water and start to
decant water into the inner bowl. In
the inner bowl there is a hose, also
connected to the valve, which will
direct the water out of the robot.
Figure 27: From bottom to top: outer bole, inner bole and head.
The biosolar cells
The biosolar cells in the robot
are made out of a glass plate,
golden leaf, glue and copper
mash. The golden leaf is put on
the glass plate with special
glue. Hot glue is then used to
make a bath on the glass plate.
After this the copper mash is
put on top. This solar cell is
now connected with the other
solar cells on the outer bowl of
the robot.
Figure 28: Grinded algae on solar cell
The sensors
The sensors of the robot are sensitive to
light. They have an opening that can be
filled with algae. When this opening is filled
with algae it will receive a dark signal. This
dark signal is the sign for the robot to
observer that there are algae. There is also
a second sensor installed that sense
whether the outer bowl is filled with algae.
If so it should move to the light. This sensor
is not working when the robot decides to
clean itself by filling the outer bowl with an
overload of water so that is will drop into
the inner bowl. The sensors also steer the
robot. The robot has two arms with sensors.
When the left or right arm turns dark in of
its sensors it will move in to that direction,
by giving a signal to the processor to change
the wing of the robot.
Figure 29: Sensors as it is in the Machine
Figure 30: Visualization of sensor
The wing and
small motor
Underneath the
robot there is a
small wing that
enables to robot to
move to right or
left. This wing is
connected to a
small motor that
enables the robot to
swim.
Figure 31: Wing and small motor
The battery
The robot has two batteries installed. One battery
powers the motors, wing and the grinder whereby the
robot can move and grind algae. The other battery,
which is charged by the solar cells, will power the
sensors, if charged. Otherwise the sensors are powered
by the other battery.
The solar cells are connected parallel and in series to optimize current
and voltage. The solar cells are completed with photosynthetic material
of the algae to generate the electron flow that is created when the solar
cell is exposed to sunlight. The generated electricity is used to charge a
battery that provides the power for the sensors.
39. 39
1.1 The electronics of the Symbiotic Machine
The Symbiotic Machine has three compartments in which electronics are installed. Each
compartment has its own unique function within the robot.
Figure 32: The Compartments A,B,C hold all electronics needed to control the robot
Compartment B: The Brain
In compartment B, the brain is installed that controls the sensors and the valve. The brain consists
out of a microprocessor (controller) type 89S8253 from Atmel. It is a very simple controller that
uses a minimum of energy. Thereby it is also possible to put it into sleep mode, which also saves
energy. The 8-bit controller has a 12K bytes In-System Programmable (ISP) Flash program memory
(Atmel, report, 2014), which is enough computing capacity to control the robot. The AT89S8253 is
thus chosen because of its low energy use in combination with enough computing capacity and
because it has enough in and out puts (Overbeek, e-mail communication, 2014).
The brain is programmed in three big sequences which are on
its turn divided in micro processes. The first big sequence is the
“search for algae” cycle. In this cycle the robot swims for a
second, stops and sense if there are algae. This cycle ends after
the Machine detects algae or if 6 minutes has collapsed. In this
cycle micro processes include the movement of the Machine to
the left or right, dependent on which sensor detects the algae. It
then moves into the “Eat algae” cycle. In this cycle the Machine
puts on the grinder that can take in the algae. The valve in the
Machine then directs the incoming algae into the outer bowl.
This cycle ends after the Machine senses it is “full” it then moves
Figure 33: The “brain” of the Machine
